Andrew Jackson- The Peoples President to what people?

Andrew Jackson was the 7th president of the United States, and is known today as "the people's president". Some of his most prominent actions were his work in the bank war, his Indian removal and his use of the soils system. Although he is referred to as the people's president, I personally believe that the majority of his presidential actions were detrimental towards the common man. The essential question for this lesson was: "Is Andrew Jackson's long-standing reputation as "the people's president" deserved? Why? Why not?" I believe that as a whole Jackson does not deserve this reputation, because although he tried to help the people in some cases, he didn't listen to the people. In class, we learned this information by splitting into groups and each going more in depth on a topic, and then doing a presentation on it. My group did a PowerPoint on the Topic of the spoils system.

Jackson believed that the banks had too much power, and because of this power they controlled the economy. When congress voted to renew the bank, Jackson vetoed the law. Some people believed that his veto was putting the people's liberty in danger, but Jackson believed that the banks as they were allowed people who weren't not elected to run the economy. The bank was supporting corporations, which Jackson did not agree with because he thought that they could grow too large, but consumers supported corporations because they thought that they could help the economy. Jacksons intentions with the bank war were good, and he was trying to do what was right for the people. Although not everyone agreed with the way that Jackson was trying to help them, I do believe that this issue shows that Jackson was the people's president. He did what he thought was best with the people's interest in mind.

The next issue of Jacksons presidency was the Indian Removal. In order for more settlers to come to America, he forced Indian tribes to leave their lands against their will and move to the west. This occured during the "Trail of Tears" in 1838. The Indians did not support moving, and wanted to stay in the land of their fathers rather than moving to unknown land. When the Indians were forced to move, thousands died because of the harsh conditions and they were forced to keep moving instead of doing their death rituals. I believe that the issue shows how Andrew Jackson was only "the people's president" to a select few. The Indians had fought for the US in many wars and instead of thanking them for their help Jackson treated them inhumanly, and forced over 100,000 Indians to move against their will.

The last issue that Jackson dealt with was the spoils system. A spoil system is when a political party or leader gives jobs to his supporters after he has won and election. After Jackson won, people who did not support him lost their jobs and were replaced by his supporters, regardless of their skill in the field. The goverment was negatively affected because of this. Jackson decided to give the job of handling the port of New York to Van Buren, a known criminal, and did not listen to people's thoughts against this. Van Burnen ended up leaving the port with over 1 million dollars. I believe that this shows how biased Andrew Jackson was, and he ended up damaging the effectiveness of the goverment in order to give his supporters jobs. He may be viewed as the people's president in his supporters eyes, but for all other citizens he was clearly biased and made decisions without considering how they would effect others.

Democracy in Early 1800 America!

In class, we created posters that depicted how democracy was during the 1800s in America. We based the posters off of our essential question for this lesson, which was: How should we define democracy? How democratic was the United States during the early 1800s? To find out the answers to these questions, we looked at a painting of an election. A flaw that this picture shows is that there was no way to  tell if someone had voted more than once, so they had to take someone's word if they had voted before. Instead of privately casting your vote, you would yell it out and everyone would know who you voted for. Besides black men,men from all walksof life had the ability to vote and no vote counts more because of that persons role in society. The next set of sources that we analyzed were voting charts. It showed how certain requirements for voting changed over time. In 1790, 10 states required that you owned property, but by 1855 barely any states had this requirement. During the same time period, over 20 states joined the union. Something else that changed drastically during this time period is how presidents were elected. In 1816, all states elected their presidents by their legislature, but in 1836, all states except South Carolina elected their president by the people. This shows how the United States were becoming more democratic and giving more people a say in their goverment, instead of just the people in charge. The last reference that we looked at was on the Dorr war, run by Thomas Dorr. He recognized some of the unjust and outdated laws against voting and launched a campaign against them. An example of a law that didn't make sense was in Rhode Island, voting was restricted to men who owned land and their eldest son. Dorr formed a convention to make a new constitution without these laws, but was arrested for treason. Eventually, he was pardoned of this and a new constitution was made. It is clear to see in the early 1800s, democracy in America was full of flaws. But, over the course of only about 30 years, the countries in America began to change their ways to make things more fair for their citizens, and become and democracy that allowed people from all walks of life to vote. Although women and and blacks being aloud to vote was still a long way off, America moved in the right direction during this time period. 

My groups poster on Democracy

Powerful People Threatened: The Congress of Vienna

The congress of Vienna was held to resolve the problems that were currently taking over Europe. All of the countries were concerned by Napoleon, who was threatening to take over nearly all of Europe. The decisions made during the Congress of Vienna were to protect the nations and the people in power. The essential question for this lesson was "What should people in power do when their power is threatened?" To understand what exactly the people in power did to defend themselves, we went deeper into who made up the congress of Vienna and what decisions they made. From watching a video, we learned who Klemens von Metternich was, and his role in the congress of Vienna, as well as his relationship with Napoleon.  We then looked at three problems that Metternich had to face during the congress, and predict what he chose to do, based on the ideologies that Metternich believed in. We then learned what his decision actually was, and why he chose this decision. Finally, we saw the impacts that the Congress of Vienna had on Europe as a whole.


One problem that was handled at the congress of Vienna how to avoid future revolutions from happening. The solution was to set up a system of alliance, called the holy alliance. The Holy Alliance, created by the Russian Czar Alexander said that monarchs have a divine right to rule. It was made up of the four largest powers in Europe, Great Britian, Russia, Prussia and Austria, and gave these powers the right to send their own troops into another country to stop a revolution and restore a monarchy. An example of the Holy Alliance in action is when, in 1820, there was an uprising in Italy and the Austrian army came in and crushed it. The Holy Alliance impacted Europe by successfully crushing revolutions that happened and keeping monarchs in power. The Congress of Vienna as a whole had a very large impact on Europe. Although the reason the Congress was necessary was because of Frances leader, Napoleon, France was not viewed as the enemy, and therefore not punished for Napoleons wrong doings. Napoleon, and Napoleon alone, was punished for what he had done on behalf of his country.With that being said, artwork that was stolen during Napoleons conquest was required to be returned and France was required to pay fines for this.




The Congress of Vienna, in conclusion, was fairly successful, because until 1853 (38 years!) there were no wars between the 5 major military powers of Europe. Personally, I agree with the decisions that the people in power at the Congress of Vienna made, although I do think that they went to somewhat of an extreme to make sure that they would not be harmed, when the people might have benefited more if they focused more on how it would affect all of the people in Europe, and not just the ones in power. I think that the congress's decision to not blame France for what Napoleon did was the most admirable and just decision that was made during the congress. I believe that the congress handled that situation very well, and managed not to blame innocent people, which is something that powerful people sometimes do when trying to preserve their own power. In history, it should be noted that a lot of the time powerful people risk the lives of their people for their own gain, but I believe that the congress of Vienna is a good example of how powerful people can keep their power while still caring for their people.

Klemens von Metternich

the Austrian host of the Congress of Vienna

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Graf_Clemens_Metternich.jpg

Latin American Revolutions: Mexico, Brazil and Gran Colombia

Recently I learned about the Latin American revolutions that occurred in the 1800s, after the successful Haitian revolution. The essential question for this lesson is "Why is it essential to acknowledge human value regardless of race? How are the events in the Latin American Revolutions evidence of this social imperative?" This question is important to think about because many times in the worlds history people have been discriminated against because of their ethnicity and not given equal opportunities in life as those whose differences are only the color of their skin. In class, we separated into groups and each group was given a specific revolution to research more in depth, and my group was given the Mexican Revolution. To understand better how things were in Mexico at this time, we looked at the different ethnicity's that made up Mexico, and created a pie chart to show their populations. By reading about the revolution, we created a timeline of what happened.

This is my groups timeline of the events that happened during the Mexican Revolution:

January 1811 - Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla got captured, and executed.
1820 - Liberals took power in Spain and new government promised reforms.
Early 1821 - Agustin de Iturbine, leader of royal forces, negotiated plan of Iguala with Vicente Guerro.
August 24th 1821 - Spanish Viceroy Juan de O'Donoju signed Treaty of Córdoba.
1822 - No Bourbon monarch to rule Mexico, Iturbine made Emperor 

1823 - leaders Santa Anna and Guaralope Victoria deposed Iturbide and set up republic.

The way that the people of Mexico went about their revolution is very different than the revolutions that happened in Gran Columbia and Brazil. Something that the people chose to do differently was how they fought during the revolution. The Brazilian revolution was completely peaceful, but both the Gran Colombian and Mexican revolutions had violence involved. Another difference is all three revolutions were led by different people. The leader of the Mexican revolution was miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, the leader in of the Brazilian revolution was Pedro, and the leader of the revolution in Gran Columbia was Simon Bolivar. A similarity of these revolutions is that they were  all fought in order to receive independence. Also, all of these revolutions occurred in the same time period, in the early 1800s. Another similarity between these revolutions is that they were all fought for independence.

Even though these revolutions took different approaches, all three were similar because race was an issue. The leader of the Brazilian revolution, Pedro, used race against his people, only allowing Portuguese born people and Peninsulars into his cabinet. Because of this, his people begin to like him less. In the Gran Columbian revolution, the leader, Simon Bolivar, brought races together by having them all fight in the army. The goal of his revolution was to end the racial segregation that was created by the current Spanish caste system. Lastly, race played a large role in the Mexican revolution. The leader, Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla wanted restore racial equality by ending the Spanish rule over Mexico. All three leaders made race a large part of their revolutions and based their decisions on it, for equality or segregation.

Sometimes in today's world we forget what an immense role race once played on peoples everyday lives. In addition, we live in a place where racism is barely an issue, so we may not realize how some peoples lives are affected everyday by it. In the south, racism is still a work in progress, and unfortunately we are far from racial equality in all of America. Recently, race has been one of the biggest topics in the news, after the events that took place in Ferguson, Missouri. An unarmed black man was killed by a white cop, and the trial concluded that the cop was not guilty of murder. While this is an awful conclusion given the evidence, I believe that it shows how much we have improved as a nation. Not because of the decision, but how people reacted to it, maybe not in the most peaceful ways, but people expressed their dissatisfaction for this racial inequality, something that decades ago would never have happened. I still believe that we, as a country, need a lot of work until racial equality can be a reality. I think that it is important to look at the issue of race in our lives, because innocent people are still being affected by this, and it is not fair. If we ignore the issue, then it will not get any better and more innocent people will have to suffer. Although I believe that each day our country is getting closer to racial equality, and it is nowhere near as extreme and cruel as it used to be, it is still a topic that needs to be addressed and something that must be worked on.

 

                                                    Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, Leader of the Mexican Revolution        http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bf/Miguel_Hidalgo_y_Costilla.png

How Should We Remember Toussaint Louverture?

         A great leader is required to have many impressive qualities to be considered great. Abraham Lincoln is remembered for countless qualities that helped him to lead America in the best way possible. One of his more prominent achievements is that liberated the slaves from the southern parts of the United States. A leader whose achievement parallels that of Abraham Lincoln is Toussaint Louverture. Louverture was the ruler of Saint Domingue, but his more impressive accomplishments are what he did for his country as ruler, and even before. He, with the help of his army, was crucial in the liberating of the slaves that took up far more than the majority of the population of Saint Dominuge. He also proved to be an extraordinary military commander, and, although harsh, did an incredible job. Toussaint Louverture should be remembered, not only as the leader of Saint Domingue, but more importantly for his liberation of the slaves and his work as military commander.
              Tousaint Louverture was born a slave, but was eventually given his freedom an and in 1790 he joined a slave revolt in the northern region of Saint Domingue, and in 1792 he was given the title of military commander. In 1794 he changed who he was fighting against. Previously, he had led his troops against the French, but when the french abolished slavery, he began to support them in hopes that it would end slavery in Saint Domingue. After the French revolution ended, Napoleon sent troops to Saint Domingue to reinstate slavery, and Louverture reacted to this by writing a letter to the French directory. In this letter he demanded that the people of Saint Domingure would not be re-enslaved, and if they would continue trying to enforce this, the people would not hesitate to react and fight back. A powerful line from his letter says "Could men who have once enjoyed the benefits of liberty look calmly while it was taken from them." This shows how strong his views were against slavery, and how far he was willing to go to protect his people from ever having to suffer through it again.
           Toussaint Louverture was a military genius that challenged the seemingly invincible Napoleon Bonaparte. Unfortunatley, some of the choices that he made caused the former slaves to distrust him. The entire economy of Saint Dominuge was based on its sugar plantations, which were responsible for 40% of the worlds coffee. The former slaves had worked on these plantations, and to keep the economy afloat, Louverture required that they continue to work at the plantations, this time for pay. In October 1801, rebels revolted against this requirement by massacring a lot of whites. Louverture reacted by forcing some of the rebels to kill themselves and having his nephew executed. Although this is cruel and extreme, it shows how tough Louverture was and how far he was willing to go to do what he believed was in the best interest for the people he was leading. Another example of his military instincts that benefitted his people was, when the French were coming to the city of Samana to re-enslave the people of Saint Domingue, Louverture and his troops burned the city down to prevent them from succeeding. When the French arrived in the city, "they found nothing but smoldering ruins, where once stood splendid cities." Louverture took risks others may have not, but in the end it is clear that he did what was best for his country.
             To have the power to free the slaves and command the military, Toussaint Louverture had to be the ruler of Saint Domingue. As leader he made decisions that created unhappy people, but he believed that they were necessary for the good of the country. An example of this is that he forced the former slaves to continue to work on the plantations they had worked at as slaves. The commission that created Saint Domingues constitution of 1801 was headed by Toussaint Louverture. In the constitution, it promised that all men are free, and plantations should be run as 'families'. His goal in doing this was to motivate his people to be supportive of keeping their positions, explaining the family dynamic as an ideal situation. Four months later, Toussaint Louverture creates a proclamation that goes back on his word. He explains in the proclamation how strict that the plantations should be run, and the extreme consequences for leaving. An example of his extreme views are when he says "as soon as a child can walk, he should be employed on the plantain according to his strength in some useful work…" This is excessive and extreme, and resembles the enslaved Saint Dominuge rather than the new one. Toussaint Louverture was a very important leader, but some of his decisions may not have been the best for his people, and because of this, his leadership of his country isn't as important as his role as liberator of slaves and military commander.
         Toussaint Louverture was an incredible man who should be remembered for his great achievements. Similar to Abraham Lincoln, he liberated the slaves of his country of Saint Dominigue, chaing 500,000 peoples lives for the better. He also commanded a military that held its own against Napoleon, who is believed to be the strongest military genius of all time. Lastly, he was the leader of Saint Domininigue, and although he was forced to make decisions that would not make his people happy, his toughness allowed his leadership skills to shine through. The country of Haiti, formally know as Saint Domingue would be nothing and would have achieved nothing with the fearless Toussaint Louverture.

Revolutions of 1830 and 1848: How successful were they?

For this lesson, the class was split into groups, and each group was given a revolution that for the most part occurred in 1830 or 1848. After doing the proper research for their revolution, each group made a survey monkey, a list of about 10 questions about their revolution for the others in the class to take so that they could learn about it. The essential question for this lesson was "Were the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 really failures  as many historians have concluded?" To help us answer this, we all made scale to measure how much of a failure/success a revolution was. With this, it was easier for us to see where each revolution fell on the scale. From the scale, we only concluded that one of the revolutions was a complete revolution. All other revolutions were either a partial failure or even more of a success.                                                                                                  

My groups revolution was the Deccemberist revolution of 1825. This revolution took place in 1825, and it was against the new Tsar, Tsar Nicholas. After the Tsar Alexanders death, most people assumed that Constantine, the older brother of Alexander I, would take the throne. Constantine did not have any interest in taking the crown, to the peoples dismay. Before Alexander died, the people planned to assassinated him, already unhappy with the government. When he died the hoped that Constantine would take the throne, because his ideals were the same as the people, an he would have run a government that the people would have wanted. Instead, Tsar Nicholas took the throne, someone who felt very strongly about the military, and did not want a democracy or to the people in lower social classes to have any say in the government, creating another horrible government situation for the people. The people wanted to overthrow Tsar Nicholas, put Constantine in the thrown, receive a constitution and stop the serfdom and poverty that was widely occurring in the nation. The revolt happened when the people revolting crowded around guards, and when told to halt by Nicholas they said that they were for Constantine. Hesitantly, Nicholas saw no other choice but to fire on his own people to stop the revolt from continuing. This was the end of the revolution, and since the people received nothing they wanted and were fired on by their leader, this would be considered a complete failure.


The next revolution that happened was the French revolution of 1830. After Louis XVIII died, his brother, Charles X took over the throne. He believed and absolutism, the thing that Louis XVIII was trying so hard to avoid. When he took the throne in 1824, he took away a lot of the peoples rights like limiting the right to vote and restricting the press. The liberals and radicals were not pleased by this, and used violence to get their message across, resulting in Charles X fleeing to England. After this, Louis Philippe became the citizen king, extending suffrage, which is something the french wanted, but only to the upper class, and because of this the bourgeoisie prospered, but the other people of France did not. This revolution would be, in my opinion, considered in the middle of the spectrum because the people did get some of the things the wanted, but other things, like suffrage, were only given to the upper class. France had another revolution again in 1848, just 18 years after the previous. In this revolution the people were upset that Louis Phillipe did not give them enough rights, so they took to the streets in protest. The government set up national workshops so the people of France had more opportunities for jobs, but in June these workshops were shut down being viewed as a waste of money. After the workshop closed a new constitution was created. The constitution gave voting right to all adult man, and created a one house legislature and a president. Louis Napoleon won this election, but soon he took over the title of emperor ending the republic, but still had a lot of support from the people. In my opinion, I view this revolution more as a success than as a failure because the people got things that they wanted, like being able to vote, and having a better economy, even if it was not all that they wanted. Another revolution was the Revolution of Hungarian Independence 1848. In this revolution,  the Austrian empire was ruled by Metternich when a revolt broke out, and when the people supported it Metternich fled. Other places in the empire began wanting freedom as well, and wanted an end to serfdom and a constitution. The government ended up agreeing with these reforms, but unfortunately Austrian troops regained control of Vienna and Prague, and rebels were put in prison executed or exiled. This revolution is closer to a failure than a success, but the people did receive what they were fighting for, if only for a short amount of time. I believe that the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 were altogether more of a success than a failure. Even though none of the revolutions ended up getting everything they were fighting for, in most cases they received some things, and their countries in the future would possibly learn from what the people wanted in the past, so even if not at that time, someday the people fighting for revolutions may eventually receive it.

60 Seconds of Conservatism, Liberalism and Nationalism

In our ideologies lesson, we focused on the three major ideologies of the 19th century. These were liberalism, conservatism and nationalism. We began our first activity by writing the definitions that we believed went with each ideology. This was to prevent misconceptions, and make clear the differences between how these words were used today and how they were used in the 19th century. Today, someone who is a conservative is viewed as being more strict and close minded, but the definition was very different in the 19th century. Then, it meant someone who wanted to keep the church and monarchy in power, and did not believe in innovation. They believed that if something had worked in the past then they should change it. Since these definitions are so different, they change your opinion on  the person who claims to believe it. Because of this, it was important to clarify between what these words are used for today and how they were used in the 18th century. We then were split into groups and given a specific ideology, where we would make a 1 minute video answering the essential question for our ideology. The essential question was; What were the major political ideologies of the 19th century and how did they influence social and political action?



My group had the ideology nationalism. For our 1 minute presentation, we chose to do an educreations video where we explained the social impact, the political impact and examples of nationalism during the 19th century. We defined our ideology by saying that it was the bringing together of nations through shared language, culture, and history. This means that the people in a country were brought together and connected by their language, culture and history, and therefore made stronger by this bond. It impacted the social aspect of countries in the 19th century because people were brought together because of their shared culture. An example of this is when the Italians and Germans were ruled by Napoleon, they learned that if they came together as a nation then they would be stronger. It impacted the political action of countries in the 19th century because it was believe that they needed to come together to fulfill their "historic role" as a nation, and progress as a humanity. An example of this is Adresses to German Nations was written to urge the german people to unite for the greater good.


I learned quite a lot about the other two ideologies, Conservatism and Liberalism, by the other groups 60 second presentations. I learned that conservatism supported the church and the monarchy, and opposed innovation and reform. People who believe in conservatism believe completely in tradition, and not changing it. They do not believe in meritocracy, and instead believe in aristocracy. They thought that innovation led to bloodshed and fighting, so they were very much against it. They supported tradition and thought that it was the only trustworthy way to have social and political action. I learned that Liberalism is the idea that enforces preserving the rights of the people. Adam Smiths "invisible hand" is an example of Liberalism because people have the right to do what they want. Unlike conservatism, Liberalism supported meritocracy, meaning that people were elected based on their skills and not their social class.

Praised and Despised: Napoleon Bonaparte's Role in History

Napoleon Bonaparte is know widely for his impacts on France, and eventually all of Europe. Although he was flawless in the tactics of war, other faults such as greed would ultimately lead to a bitter downfall. Though we often think of him as a fearless tyrant, he had impacts on the social, political and economic systems of Europe that will never be forgotten. In the time that Napoleon ruled France, he invaded and conquered many European countries.


Many people have strong opinions on Napoleon and his life, each vastly different from the others. Madame de Stael was a women who despised Napoleon and all that he stood for. She believed that he was a vicious tyrant, who persuaded men by force and viewed all other ways incorrect. She thought that he intruded "daily upon France's liberty and England's independence." Madame de Stael believed that Napoleons government was against virtue, dignity, religion and enthusiasm. As a member of the nobility and the daughter of King Louis XVI's former financial advisor, her background gives an obvious explanation as to why she would be against a government that is not run in this way.
Marshal Michel Ney praised Napoleon and viewed him as a hero. He believed that Napoleon was a savior of France and that the people should worship him for this. Since he was from the middle class, he was previously against a government that suppressed its people, and embraced one that gave its people freedom and their rights. Napoleon impacted the social system of Europe by creating a new form of government, one that put the previous nobility out of power. For some, this game them more rights and freedoms because they were not being ruled by these people. For others, this brought down their social class and took away some of their rights as well as their wealth. Towards the end his time ruling, he began to embrace and continue his domination in extreme ways, and changes the social system by making all men below him and not considering them in his ruling, and caused the people to fear him. He eventually believe that failure was possible and his egotistic and overly confident personality was, in my opinion, the ultimate cause for his downfall.


On the spectrum of good and evil, I personally believe that Napoleon  Bonaparte lies somewhere in the middle. He was a military genius the world has yet to see again, and may never see again. Instead of people being judged by only their social class, he judged them by their skills, giving more people a chance to reach success. He conquered a lot of Europe, but he had a lot of positive impacts in these countries. With all of his great qualities, I believe that Napoleon was also overly confident. He was fully aware of his genius and used it to his advantage. I think that towards the end of his reign he became encompassed in his success and become delusional, believing that he could do anything and there was no way that he could fail. During this time I believe that he did more bad that good, acting as a tyrant rather than a leader giving equality to all. Regardless of his bad qualities, it is without question that Napoleon was a genius, and deserves all the fame and time studying him that we do today. Whether you agree or disagree with his actions, there is no arguing with the fact that he is an important part of our worlds history.

All You Need To Know About Napoleon Bonaparte 

The Lost Voices of Napoleonic History: http://www.napoleon-series.org/research/biographies/c_historians.html

http://www.thekidswindow.co.uk/News/Napoleon_Bonaparte.htm

A Candy Economy: Representing Capitalism, Socialism and Communism with Hershey's Kisses!

We represented communism, socialism and capitalism in class in a more simplistic way, using Hershey's kisses. The simulation started with the teacher, representing the ruler, handing out the candy. The majority of the class received 3 Hershey's kisses, but some received 10. This showed how some people started with unfair advantages. We then played rock paper scissor, and the winner took a Hershey's kiss from the loser. Obviously, the people who had 10 Hershey's kisses had a better chance of staying in the game longer, and didn't have to work as hard as others to get the same result. In the end, some people ended up with a lot of Hershey's kisses, and a lot of people ended up with none. This represented capitalism. Everyone had a "fair" chance in getting a lot of Hershey's kisses, except for those who started with 10. In theory, this system seems fair, and in some ways it is. The majority of people have the same chance to get a lot of Hershey's kisses, and those who ended up with a lot mostly won a lot at rock paper scissor to get them. But, some people who started with 10 didn't have to win that many games to stay at the top. We then all sat down, some of us had no Hershey's kisses left, and some had more than 10. The teacher then collected all of our Hershey's kisses, and gave each person 3. We then had the opportunity to play rock paper scissor again if we wanted to get more Hershey's kisses. Some people chose to do this, but the majority of the class stayed seated, content with their 3, not wanting to risk losing them. Some people who played ended up with more than 3, and some ended up with less.  This represented socialism. Each person was given the same amount of Hershey's kisses, and they had the opportunity to try and get more. You also had the option to stay with the 3 that you had. This is fair because everyone gets the same amount, but can try and get more if they want. Some people who try and get more end up with less than they had to begin with, but that is a risk that they took in trying to get more. It is not fair because the people who tried to get more Hershey's kisses ended up with less than those who did no work. The teacher than once again collected all of our chocolates and gave each person three, but this time there was no opportunities to play for more. This represented communism. Each person received the same amount. It was fair because nobody had any more than anyone else, but it wasn't fair because some people worked harder than others and had the same as them. All three of these systems have their faults, and none give equality to everyone.

Karl Marx and Adam Smith were two men who had vastly different ideas on how to create a steady economy. Adam Smiths theory was "the invisible hand". He believed that the government should not intervene with the economy, and allow people to deal with it themselves. He believed that they would do whatever was necessary to create competition between people so they would all have enough money. An "invisible hand" would guide the economy without the help of the government. In theory, this works flawlessly, but if put into practice, it may take longer for the economy to get to this point, and most governments would feel it necessary to step in to help guide it rather then letting the people do it themselves. Smith created his theory mainly to benefit the poor. If the people had to compete with each other, they would be more inclined to sell higher quality products at lower prices, so the poor could afford it and have more options. Marx also believed in helping the poor, because his theory was communism. He stated that what happened in our class experiment would happen with a society, going from capitalism to socialism and finally ending with communism, creating a classless, equal society. He saw how some people were working hard in capitalism and failing, and others weren't working hard at all and were still wealthy. He did not believe that this was fair, and wanted to create a society where everyone was given the same amount of money so that nobody was poor, or too wealthy.


I believe that The Invisible Hand is the best theory. I think that in this theory, people would receive what they deserve. Those who work harder would receive more money, and those who do not would not receive as much money. The theory still allows for everyone to have enough money, and the competition would help more people to have enough, and nobody to have much more than others. This theory would also allow higher quality things to be sold at lower prices because of how competitive the economy would be. This would allow people with less money to still be able to afford nicer things. The theory also does not include the government, so the people in the society completely control their economy, and all have a say in it.




The Invisible Hand- 60 Second Adventures in Economics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulyVXa-u4wE&feature=youtu.be

Mini Bio- Karl Marx

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16IMc5mhbZk&feature=youtu.be

What's in it for me? : Why Women Went to Lowell Mills

For many New England teenage girls in the 1800's, they wanted nothing more than to be able to go to the Lowell Mills to work. The Lowell Experiment was created to be a more humane version of the factories of England, and they used may precautions to ensure this outcome. A lot of amazing things were promised to the farm girls who had never been out of their town. Freedom, independence and a way to earn money were tactics used to persuade the girls to leave their small towns and their families, and come to Lowell. The families were convinced by knowing they would have one less mouth to feed, and extra money that could be sent home. It was also stressed that all girls who worked in the factory would have to mantain dignity and morality to keep their job. The Lowell Exerpiment also created a paternal system that was similar to the dynamic between families so the Mills would seem more appealing to parents. There was a lot of rules that the girls had to follow, including a 10 pm curfew, required church on Sundays and a strict behavioral code. At the boardinghouse where the girls lived, there was a boardinghouse keeper, who regulated the behavior outside of the mill hours. The strict rules and the money being brought home convinced many families to allow their daughters to go to the mills. The daughters were convinced to come to Lowell because most had never left the town that they lived in, and Lowell seemed like an incredible city full of adventure, and the young girls wanted to see the world. Going to Lowell would give the girls a lot more independence than they had ever had, and since they were only teenagers, they wanted independence.

For the most part, everything promised above was given at Lowell Mills. But, there was a lot of downsides to going to Lowell. The conditions in Lowell were almost incomparable to the conditions of Britian because they were so much better, but there was still some danger. Accidents of girls getting hurt or dying because of the machines did occur in Lowell. In the documentary Daughters of Free Men, the girls suffer from a large wage cut, and they do not make enough money to pay for their boardinghouse rent. The girls wrote speeches and petitions against the wage cut, and they eventually went on strike because of it. Instead of raising their wages, the mill owner hired new girls. This was an unfortunate side of the Lowell Experiment because it showed how the girls were replaceable, and no matter what they did, they couldn't raise their wages even if it was unfair. With that said, the girls were very educated because in their free time they went to lectures, and they became proper young women in Lowell even if it wasn't what people had done before them.

Since teenage girls moving away from home to work was such a new concept in the 1800s, people had different opinions and views on the mill girls. The mill girls showed that it was possible to have teenagers girls work and live away from home and still be very respectable girls. They were all very educated and wrote essays and speeches, and were perceived but other people as smart and educated. Some peoples opinions changed when the girls petitioned and went on strike so that they could get higher wages. Some people believes that this is not what young woman should be doing, and they thought less of them.

While their were pros and cons to going to work at Lowell Mills, most girls from the time seemed to believe that the pros outweighed the cons, and eagerly went to work there regardless of the sometimes dangerous conditions and the wage cuts that they had to endure. The girls got a lot of freedom, and the ability to live in a city, and make extra money for themselves and to send home to their families.

MOSI Google Hangout- 21st Century Field Trip!

In class, we had the opportunity to video chat with a museum in England called MOSI that specializes in the machines that were used during the industrial revolution. To prepare for the chat, we first took a look at the museums website. We read articles and viewed the pictures so we were more aware of what to expect. We discussed what we saw on the website and it helped us to start off with a basic knowledge of the museum. We then watched a video of the museum, with Jamie, the man who would be hosting our chat. We wrote down the vocabulary from the video, so that during the chat we could use it and be aware of what it meant if Jamie used it. The vocabulary was mainly machines and tasks that were done during the revolution, so learning what these were helped even more to get a visual of what the factories were like. After this, we had a good amount of background knowledge on the factories and  machines, so we began to form questions that we could as Jamie during the chat.This way, we wouldn't forget anything we were curious about or didn't understand during the chat, because we would have all the questions down. The questions that I chose were "What were the potential injuries that could occur from factory workers?" and "How much has cotton process changed from the 1700s until now?"

Although I was absent the day of class that we did the chat, I still feel that it helped me. From the videos and notes I have seen from it, I have learned a great amount about what happened during it. I have watched videos of what happened during the chat and gotten notes of what was talked about, and I feel a lot more informed about the textile process than I previously was. I was aware that there was a large amount of injuries and sickness that came with working at the mills, but I didn't think that it was to the extent that Jamie explained it as. Many of the health problems were caused because people would breath in cotton fibers. I had never previously thought that this was an issue, but this caused people to have bad lungs, and after years, people would sometimes die because of their lungs. Children would clean the machines while they worked, and the young girls hair would sometimes get pulled into the machines and they would get scalped. Something else that had never occurred to me that might be a problem was peoples hearing. Some people even went deaf because of the noise of the machines. Because the factories were so overcrowded, it was easy for disease to spread. The main focus was never on the cleanliness or hygiene of the factories, so this created an even larger risk for disease. Besides disease, the machines were very unsafe and there was a large risk for injuries, especially in young children who didn't know better. One job of children was to clean the sped frame, and sometimes their hands would go in between the machines and mangle their hands and fingers. Children were sometimes crushed by the machines,and it was rare that they would survive. It surprised me to see learn that if you were injured and sick and could not work, you had to live on the street. I was shocked to learn about this cruel treatment.

Even though I wasn't there to have this experience first hand, I learned a lot from it. I think that it is incredible that with todays technology we have the opportunity to virtually tour a museum in a different country, and speak with an expert on the subject. Even 10 years ago this experience would have been impossible, and I am so thankful that I live when it is. It has helped me to get a better understanding of the textile industry and life during the industrial revolution. I think that I am more of a visual learner, so having this interactive experience rather than reading information from a textbook helped me to grasp the ideas a lot better. I would love to have similar experiences throughout the school year and I think that they would be very beneficial to my learning.

Pros and Cons of The Industrial Revolution

We became curators in history by looking at and analyzing sources with some relation to the industrial revolution. My group had sources that showed the horrible conditions the revolution created, as well as the poverty and pollution. We analyzed the sources and figured out what the important topic in each was, and what message it was trying to convey. We found that they all showed negative effects of the revolution, and we concluded that this would be the topic of our exhibit.

We went through the curating process for our sources, much like someone would in an actual museum. Once we had read and looked at all of our sources, we concluded what they had in common, and we made this the theme of our exhibit. For us, all the sources had poverty and pollution in common, so that is what we made the theme of our exhibit. When we put our sources on our poster, we placed them in a way that flowed, so that people viewing the exhibit would understand the information better. We made small descriptions for each source, so that the people viewing the exhibit wouldn't have to interpret the information for themselves. We also grouped like things together, and highlighted important information from large pieces of text. I think that in doing this, I got a better understanding of my topic and sources, and I understood the information in other peoples exhibits better.

The first exhibit that I viewed was about the production of cotton and slavery. I was shocked to see how much slavery increased after the textile industry took off. While I believe that the the production of cotton was a very good thing, and critical to advancing Great Britain as well as the world, I have a new opinion on it knowing how many slaves where used.

The next exhibit I viewed was on spinning wheels and power looms. I learned from this exhibit that before these inventions an entire family would work together at their home to make their clothing. After the inventions, only one person from a family went to work in a factory. While the inventions had so many benefits, I was surprised to realize that it caused families to not spend as much time together.


The last exhibit that I viewed was on child labor during the industrial revolution. I was shocked to see that the majority of the people were under the age of 10 years old. I of course was aware that there was slavery in the cotton factories, but I had no idea that children so young were working. In todays world, it is unimaginable to picture someone as young as 9 working, especially in such harsh conditions. The pictures that went along with this exhibit amazed me even more, and made me feel so thankful for the opportunities I have and the era in which I live. The exhibit really opened my eyes about the downsides of the revolution, and I now view the Industrial Revolution, while having a lot of benefits, as a very flawed era.

When I had previously heard about the industrial revolution, it made me think of a time period in which great improvements were made to society that still benefit us. I thought of a time that great minds created great, innovate things that changed the way that things worked for the better. While this still holds true in my mind, with a more in depth understanding of the Industrial Revolution I see how many faults it has. The pollution, slavery, child labor, and families being torn apart make me rethink my statement of the revolution being beneficial. I know believe that the Industrial Revolution was a time that was full of inventions and improvements to life, but has an horrific side that we can learn from and make sure never occurs again.

Benefits of the Industrial Revolution

In class we looked at all of the critical aspects of the industrial revolution. We examined how transportation, resources, technology, innovations in textiles, and people all effected the revolution. The industrial revolution helped to change the way that things work in England, and we are still benefitting from its affects today. Two aspects that I believe are especially important are the people and transportation.

Without the people, the revolution would not have occurred. For centuries, the majority of people made their living by being farmers. The industrial revolution brought improved farming, which was less labor intensive, and required less people to farm more land. Since farming was now less difficult, and more land could be farmed by less people, wealthy land owners began to fence off their land so that peasant who used it to farm could not anymore. This process is called enclosure. It caused the farmers to move to cities to find jobs, creating a large labor force that would work on machines,  furthering the  revolution. The improved farming also meant that people could eat better food, and be healthy, live longer, and have healthier children. Having people live longer was an amazing and revolutionary thing that occurred because of the revolution. Because of enclosure, people began to work on machines, speeding up the revolution, and allowing more things to occur.

The industrial revolution was when a lot of technology was first created. Abraham Darby greatly improved iron, which benefited the economy. He created a way to remove impunity from coal, and separate iron from its ore. This made the iron better quality, and it was used to build railroads. This iron was also much less expensive, which helped the economy. Something else created was the steam engine. Even though it was invented so long ago, it is still used today. The steam engine powered boats trains, and locomotives, helping to greatly increase and improve the transportation. It was also used to pump water out of mines.  These technological advances may seem minor in todays world, but without them, we could not have have the advances in technology we know today. Hundreds of years later the steam engine is still used, and a crucial part of our lives. With these advances of the revolution, the world we know today would be completely different.

Steam Engine

http://www.antiquefarming.com/steamengine.html 

A Google A Day Keeps the Tree Octopus Away

In class today, we used the website agoogleaday.com  to help us improve our search skills on the Internet. A detailed question was given, and we had to use google to find the answer. In order to get the correct answer, we had to use certain skills to make sure that our answer was accurate, authentic, and reliable. The website gave tips on how to search in order to find certain information. For example, to find an exact set of words, you must put quotes around them when searching.

I enjoyed this activity and I believe that I will be able to find better information easier in the future because of it. When searching, it was sometimes difficult because the correct answer couldn't be found. Although it was frustrating to not find the answer at first, revising the search using certain skills helped find the answer, and I will now have the knowledge to search in this way in the future. I learned that putting in certain symbols will change the results of your search, and can help you to find what your are looking for more efficiently.

When searching for something online, the three things that you must look for are authenticity, accuracy, and reliability. Authenticity is when something is real, but most importantly genuine. This means that the website is doing what they say they are. It has no hidden agenda, and the goal of the website is clear. Accuracy is when something is correct. This means that the information on the website is true, precise, and valid. Reliability is when the website can be trusted as giving true information. This can be proven by the credibility of the author, or the sources used to create the website.

The website for the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus is a good example of a website that does not meet all three requirements, and therefore is not a good source. Although at a glance the website seems to have good information, and includes pictures, links, and sophisticated information about the Tree Octopus, it is not reliable or accurate. The website is authentic, the goal stated is to raise awareness of the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus, and that is what the website does. But, the information is not reliable, because it is the only website with any information about the Tree Octopus. The website is not accurate because the Tree Octopus does not exist.

A Picture of the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus:

http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/

What I Will Do With My Education

         
My name is Lorraine and this is my blog!


            I think that a great teacher is one who can help a student to understand something completely and clearly. A great teacher is one who can make the information that they are teaching interesting and fun to learn, while still teaching relevant and important topics. One of my favorite past teachers was my 8th grade english teacher. She used many different methods to help us to learn and had us do unique assignments that helped us understand the information a lot better and in an enjoyable way. This year I am excited to have a class completely using technology, and I think that this will help me to learn better and stay a lot more organized.

              John Green explains that it is our duty to use our education, and I agree with his thinking. I think that we sometimes take for granted how lucky we are to be able to have such a good education available to everyone, and I think that we should use this privilege to the best of our ability, and with our education improve create and improve on what has already been done to better the world. This year I hope to stay organized and complete all of my assignments for all of my classes in a way that I am proud of. I am on the high school cheerleading team and I hope that we do well in our competitions. I also hope to meet new people and make new friends this year. I am going to achieve my goals by staying motivated and focused, and remembering them so I can be even more compelled to complete them.



John Greens Video "An Open Letter to Students Returning to School"